[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       wine-devel
Subject:    Re: msvideo fix (1 out of 3)
From:       Eric Pouech <Eric.Pouech () wanadoo ! fr>
Date:       2001-01-30 19:57:40
[Download RAW message or body]

> We could certainly add a lot of complexity to be able to do it, but I
> don't see any point; the whole concept of circular dependencies is
> broken. We have to support it at the loader level because of stupid
> Microsoft dlls, but I don't think there's any reason to support it for
> builtin dlls.
it maybe stupid, but DLLs interface show up circular dependencies. You
may like it or not, but that's a fact. Not supporting it means using
function pointers, but you can introduce bugs in function prototypes...

> This is the main problem; it means you have to ship the .spec file
> along with any .so, and make sure (how?) that they stay in sync. It
> will quickly become a maintenance nightmare.
there are two issues here:
- DLLs Wine ships with, and a Winelib development (using either the
Wine DLLs, some native DLLs, or ported DLLs). Your point applies to the
latest. As M$ does for its latest version of the linker, you can either
use a .lib file (generated from a .def file) or a .dll file. winebuild
could do the same. (BTW, specmaker already does it for native DLLs).
Winebuild could get a .DLL symbols either from a .so file or from a 
.spec file. A Winelib developper could use whichever methods he/she 
likes, for Wine core compilation .spec files could be use.

A+
-- 
---------------
Eric Pouech (http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.pouech/)
"The future will be better tomorrow", Vice President Dan Quayle

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]